Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 23:54:08 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
        iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bug report] iommu_dma_unmap_sg() is very slow then running IO
 from remote numa node
Message-ID: <YPmUoBk9u+tU2rbS@T590>
References: <YOhcOv1oOwm6fco+@T590>
 <ad5bc549-d83f-bee0-9a9f-03a5afd7f3d9@huawei.com>
 <YPd7IGFZrsTRfUxE@T590>
 <74537f9c-af5f-cd84-60ab-49ca6220310e@huawei.com>
 <YPfwAN1onpSKoeBj@T590>
 <a2650064-41cf-cb62-7ab4-d14ef1856966@huawei.com>
 <YPklDMng1hL3bQ+v@T590>
 <9c929985-4fcb-e65d-0265-34c820b770ea@huawei.com>
 <YPlGOOMSdm6Bcyy/@T590>
 <fc552129-e89d-74ad-9e57-30e3ffe4cf5d@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <fc552129-e89d-74ad-9e57-30e3ffe4cf5d@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:12:05PM +0100, John Garry wrote:
> On 22/07/2021 11:19, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > If you check below, you can see that cpu4 services an NVMe irq. From
> > > checking htop, during the test that cpu is at 100% load, which I put the
> > > performance drop (vs cpu0) down to.
> > nvme.poll_queues is 2 in my test, and no irq is involved. But the irq mode
> > fio test is still as bad as io_uring.
> > 
> 
> I tried that:
> 
> dmesg | grep -i nvme
> [    0.000000] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/john/Image rdinit=/init
> crashkernel=256M@32M console=ttyAMA0,115200 earlycon acpi=force
> pcie_aspm=off noinitrd root=/dev/sda1 rw log_buf_len=16M user_debug=1
> iommu.strict=1 nvme.use_threaded_interrupts=0 irqchip.gicv3_pseudo_nmi=1
> nvme.poll_queues=2
> 
> [   30.531989] megaraid_sas 0000:08:00.0: NVMe passthru support : Yes
> [   30.615336] megaraid_sas 0000:08:00.0: NVME page size   : (4096)
> [   52.035895] nvme 0000:81:00.0: Adding to iommu group 5
> [   52.047732] nvme nvme0: pci function 0000:81:00.0
> [   52.067216] nvme nvme0: 22/0/2 default/read/poll queues
> [   52.087318]  nvme0n1: p1
> 
> So I get these results:
> cpu0 335K
> cpu32 346K
> cpu64 300K
> cpu96 300K
> 
> So still not massive changes.

In your last email, the results are the following with irq mode io_uring:

 cpu0  497K
 cpu4  307K
 cpu32 566K
 cpu64 488K
 cpu96 508K

So looks you get much worse result with real io_polling?

> 
> > > Here's some system info:
> > > 
> > > HW queue irq affinities:
> > > PCI name is 81:00.0: nvme0n1
> > > -eirq 298, cpu list 67, effective list 67
> > > -eirq 299, cpu list 32-38, effective list 35
> > > -eirq 300, cpu list 39-45, effective list 39
> > > -eirq 301, cpu list 46-51, effective list 46
> > > -eirq 302, cpu list 52-57, effective list 52
> > > -eirq 303, cpu list 58-63, effective list 60
> > > -eirq 304, cpu list 64-69, effective list 68
> > > -eirq 305, cpu list 70-75, effective list 70
> > > -eirq 306, cpu list 76-80, effective list 76
> > > -eirq 307, cpu list 81-85, effective list 84
> > > -eirq 308, cpu list 86-90, effective list 86
> > > -eirq 309, cpu list 91-95, effective list 92
> > > -eirq 310, cpu list 96-101, effective list 100
> > > -eirq 311, cpu list 102-107, effective list 102
> > > -eirq 312, cpu list 108-112, effective list 108
> > > -eirq 313, cpu list 113-117, effective list 116
> > > -eirq 314, cpu list 118-122, effective list 118
> > > -eirq 315, cpu list 123-127, effective list 124
> > > -eirq 316, cpu list 0-5, effective list 4
> > > -eirq 317, cpu list 6-11, effective list 6
> > > -eirq 318, cpu list 12-16, effective list 12
> > > -eirq 319, cpu list 17-21, effective list 20
> > > -eirq 320, cpu list 22-26, effective list 22
> > > -eirq 321, cpu list 27-31, effective list 28
> > > 
> > > 
> > > john@ubuntu:~$ lscpu | grep NUMA
> > > NUMA node(s):  4
> > > NUMA node0 CPU(s):   0-31
> > > NUMA node1 CPU(s):   32-63
> > > NUMA node2 CPU(s):   64-95
> > > NUMA node3 CPU(s):   96-127
> > > 
> > > john@ubuntu:~$ lspci | grep -i non
> > > 81:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Device
> > > 0123 (rev 45)
> > > 
> > > cat /sys/block/nvme0n1/device/device/numa_node
> > > 2
> > BTW, nvme driver doesn't apply the pci numa node, and I guess the
> > following patch is needed:
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> > index 11779be42186..3c5e10e8b0c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/nvme/host/core.c
> > @@ -4366,7 +4366,11 @@ int nvme_init_ctrl(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl, struct device *dev,
> >   	ctrl->dev = dev;
> >   	ctrl->ops = ops;
> >   	ctrl->quirks = quirks;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> > +	ctrl->numa_node = dev->numa_node;
> > +#else
> >   	ctrl->numa_node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> > +#endif
> 
> From a quick look at the code, is this then later set for the PCI device in
> nvme_pci_configure_admin_queue()?

Yeah, you are right, the pci numa node has been used.

> 
> >   	INIT_WORK(&ctrl->scan_work, nvme_scan_work);
> >   	INIT_WORK(&ctrl->async_event_work, nvme_async_event_work);
> >   	INIT_WORK(&ctrl->fw_act_work, nvme_fw_act_work);
> > 
> > > [   52.968495] nvme 0000:81:00.0: Adding to iommu group 5
> > > [   52.980484] nvme nvme0: pci function 0000:81:00.0
> > > [   52.999881] nvme nvme0: 23/0/0 default/read/poll queues
> > Looks you didn't enabling polling. In irq mode, it isn't strange
> > to observe IOPS difference when running fio on different CPUs.
> 
> If you are still keen to investigate more, then can try either of these:
> 
> - add iommu.strict=0 to the cmdline
> 
> - use perf record+annotate to find the hotspot
>   - For this you need to enable psuedo-NMI with 2x steps:
>     CONFIG_ARM64_PSEUDO_NMI=y in defconfig
>     Add irqchip.gicv3_pseudo_nmi=1
> 
>     See https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm64/Kconfig#n1745
>     Your kernel log should show:
>     [    0.000000] GICv3: Pseudo-NMIs enabled using forced ICC_PMR_EL1
> synchronisation

OK, will try the above tomorrow.

> 
> But my impression is that this may be a HW implementation issue, considering
> we don't see such a huge drop off on our HW.

Except for mpere-mtjade, we saw bad nvme performance on ThunderX2? CN99XX too,
but I don't get one CN99XX system to check if the issue is same with
this one.


Thanks,
Ming